Himachal Pradesh High Court
CIVIL APPEAL 9654 of 2013 on 31 December 2013
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.9654 of 2013
Date of decision: 31.12.2013
Surjeet Kumar …. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?[1] No.
For the Petitioner :Mr. Surender K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents :Mr. R.M. Bisht, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General.
Sanjay Karol, Judge(Oral)
It is seen that petitioner, who is working as Lecturer in Physics (on contract basis) at Government Senior Secondary School, Udaipur, District Lahaul and Spiti, has completed his normal tenure of posting in hard/tribal area. He has indicated the stations of his choice where he can be posted in terms of the Transfer Policy. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner’s representation (Annexure P-1) has been forwarded through proper channel to respondent No.2, which is still pending before the authority concerned.
2. Under instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that petitioner shall be content if a direction is issued to the said respondent to decide petitioner’s representation (Annexure P-1) expeditiously. Learned Deputy Advocate General has no objection to the same.
3. No other point is urged.
4. Leaving the question of law open, a direction is issued to respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide petitioner’s representation (Annexure P-1), in accordance with law, by affording due opportunity of hearing/representation to the petitioner, within a period of three weeks from today. Needless to add, if the order is not in favour of the petitioner, the authority shall assign reasons while deciding the same, which shall be communicated to the petitioner.
With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of, as also, the pending application(s), if any.
Copy Dasti.
(Sanjay Karol ),
Judge.
(Dharam Chand Chaudhary), Judge.
December 31, 2013(KS)